There have perhaps always been
misanthropic curmudgeons. But their unremitting pessimism has metastasized on
the intellectual dark web, as they’ve availed themselves of the social media tools
that are notorious for creating feedback loops that can nurture even the most
outlandish of poisonous discourses.
David Benatar is perhaps the most
prominent antinatalist, for example, believing that procreation is immoral
since it causes untold harms in opening the next generation to the inevitable
hardships in life. And Benatar debated Jordan Peterson on the matter.
Gary “Inmendham,” whom I debated onYouTube in 2014, has for years hammered away at conventional society for
rejecting antinatalism and misanthropy. And a blogger who writes under the name
“Existential Goof” follows much of Inmendham’s framing of the issues.
A Case for Antinatalism
Here’s the start of Existential Goof’s case for antinatalism, that is, for the ending of human
procreation and thus for the indirect suicide of our species:
my thesis is that if one accepts an
atheistic and materialistic conception of reality, then there can be no such
thing as a good or a bad that is not defined exclusively by the feelings of
sentient organisms. There is no basis for having a preference between two
different outcomes outside on the impact that those outcomes are going to have
on the feelings of yourself, or other sentient organisms. The gulf which exists
between pleasure and pain is what drives preference; and if not guided by this,
then all choices would be as arbitrary as the result of a meaningless coin
toss.
He says also that nature punishes those
who have no kids. Thus, he says, “Only when we allow ourselves to outsmart the
unintelligent forces of natural selection will humanity realise that the only
rational course for us to pursue is that of the extinction of ourselves, and of
all life. We can then realise that, in a game in which nobody can win, the best
option left to us is to cut our collective losses.”